Stefania Gottardo

ITS-NANO - Prioritising nanosafety research to develop a stakeholder driven intelligent testing strategy

BackgroundTo assess the risk of all nanomaterials (NMs) on a case-by-case basis is challenging in terms of financial, ethical and time resources. Instead a more intelligent approach to knowledge gain and risk assessment is required.MethodsA framework of future research priorities was developed from the accorded opinion of experts covering all major stake holder groups (government, industry, academia, funders and NGOs). It recognises and stresses the major topics of physicochemical characterisation, exposure identification, hazard identification and modelling approaches as key components of the current and future risk assessment of NMs.ResultsThe framework for future research has been developed from the opinions of over 80 stakeholders, that describes the research priorities for effective development of an intelligent testing strategy (ITS) to allow risk evaluation of NMs. In this context, an ITS is a process that allows the risks of NMs to be assessed accurately, effectively and efficiently, thereby reducing the need to test NMs on a case-by-case basis.For each of the major topics of physicochemical characterisation, exposure identification, hazard identification and modelling, key-priority research areas are described via a series of stepping stones, or hexagon diagrams structured into a time perspective. Importantly, this framework is flexible, allowing individual stakeholders to identify where their own activities and expertise are positioned within the prioritisation pathway and furthermore to identify how they can effectively contribute and structure their work accordingly. In other words, the prioritisation hexagon diagrams provide a tool that individual stakeholders can adapt to meet their own particular needs and to deliver an ITS for NMs risk assessment. Such an approach would, over time, reduce the need for testing by increasing the reliability and sophistication of in silico approaches.The manuscript includes an appraisal of how this framework relates to the current risk assessment approaches and how future risk assessment could adapt to accommodate these new approaches. A full report is available in electronic format (pdf) at http://www.nano.hw.ac.uk/research-projects/itsnano.html.ConclusionITS-NANO has delivered a detailed, stakeholder driven and flexible research prioritisation (or strategy) tool, which identifies specific research needs, suggests connections between areas, and frames this in a time-perspective.

Concern-driven integrated approaches to nanomaterial testing and assessment - report of the NanoSafety Cluster Working Group 10

Abstract Bringing together topic-related European Union (EU)-funded projects, the so-called “NanoSafety Cluster” aims at identifying key areas for further research on risk assessment procedures for nanomaterials (NM). The outcome of NanoSafety Cluster Working Group 10, this commentary presents a vision for concern-driven integrated approaches for the (eco-)toxicological testing and assessment (IATA) of NM. Such approaches should start out by determining concerns, i.e., specific information needs for a given NM based on realistic exposure scenarios. Recognised concerns can be addressed in a set of tiers using standardised protocols for NM preparation and testing. Tier 1 includes determining physico-chemical properties, non-testing (e.g., structure–activity relationships) and evaluating existing data. In tier 2, a limited set of in vitro and in vivo tests are performed that can either indicate that the risk of the specific concern is sufficiently known or indicate the need for further testing, including details for such testing. Ecotoxicological testing begins with representative test organisms followed by complex test systems. After each tier, it is evaluated whether the information gained permits assessing the safety of the NM so that further testing can be waived. By effectively exploiting all available information, IATA allow accelerating the risk assessment process and reducing testing costs and animal use (in line with the 3Rs principle implemented in EU Directive 2010/63/EU). Combining material properties, exposure, biokinetics and hazard data, information gained with IATA can be used to recognise groups of NM based upon similar modes of action. Grouping of substances in return should form integral part of the IATA themselves.

Risk assessment of engineered nanomaterials: a review of available data and approaches from a regulatory perspective

Abstract It has been largely recognised that substantial limitations and uncertainties make the conventional risk assessment (RA) of chemicals unfeasible to apply to engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) today, which leaves the regulators with little support in the near term. The aim of this paper is to discuss the state of the art in the area of the RA of nanomaterials, focusing on the available data and approaches. There is a paucity of reliable information in the online safety databases and the literature is dominated by (eco)toxicity studies, while the nano-exposure research lags behind. Most of the reviewed nano-RA approaches are designed to serve as preliminary risk screening and/or research prioritisation tools and are not intended to support regulatory decision making. In this context, we recommend to further study the possibilities to apply complementary/alternative tools for near-term RA of ENMs in order to facilitate their timely regulation, using the data that are currently available in the literature.

Regulatory aspects of nanotechnology in the agri/feed/food sector in EU and non-EU countries

Nanotechnology has the potential to innovate the agricultural, feed and food sectors (hereinafter referred to as agri/feed/food). Applications that are marketed already include nano-encapsulated agrochemicals or nutrients, antimicrobial nanoparticles and active and intelligent food packaging. Many nano-enabled products are currently under research and development, and may enter the market in the near future. As for any other regulated product, applicants applying for market approval have to demonstrate the safe use of such new products without posing undue safety risks to the consumer and the environment. Several countries all over the world have been active in examining the appropriateness of their regulatory frameworks for dealing with nanotechnologies. As a consequence of this, different approaches have been taken in regulating nano-based products in agri/feed/food. The EU, along with Switzerland, were identified to be the only world region where nano-specific provisions have been incorporated in existing legislation, while in other regions nanomaterials are regulated more implicitly by mainly building on guidance for industry. This paper presents an overview and discusses the state of the art of different regulatory measures for nanomaterials in agri/feed/food, including legislation and guidance for safety assessment in EU and non-EU countries.

Grouping and Read-Across Approaches for Risk Assessment of Nanomaterials

Physicochemical properties of chemicals affect their exposure, toxicokinetics/fate and hazard, and for nanomaterials, the variation of these properties results in a wide variety of materials with potentially different risks. To limit the amount of testing for risk assessment, the information gathering process for nanomaterials needs to be efficient. At the same time, sufficient information to assess the safety of human health and the environment should be available for each nanomaterial. Grouping and read-across approaches can be utilised to meet these goals. This article presents different possible applications of grouping and read-across for nanomaterials within the broader perspective of the MARINA Risk Assessment Strategy (RAS), as developed in the EU FP7 project MARINA. Firstly, nanomaterials can be grouped based on limited variation in physicochemical properties to subsequently design an efficient testing strategy that covers the entire group. Secondly, knowledge about exposure, toxicokinetics/fate or hazard, for example via properties such as dissolution rate, aspect ratio, chemical (non-)activity, can be used to organise similar materials in generic groups to frame issues that need further attention, or potentially to read-across. Thirdly, when data related to specific endpoints is required, read-across can be considered, using data from a source material for the target nanomaterial. Read-across could be based on a scientifically sound justification that exposure, distribution to the target (fate/toxicokinetics) and hazard of the target material are similar to, or less than, the source material. These grouping and read-across approaches pave the way for better use of available information on nanomaterials and are flexible enough to allow future adaptations related to scientific developments.

Frameworks and tools for risk assessment of manufactured nanomaterials.

Commercialization of nanotechnologies entails a regulatory requirement for understanding their environmental, health and safety (EHS) risks. Today we face challenges to assess these risks, which emerge from uncertainties around the interactions of manufactured nanomaterials (MNs) with humans and the environment. In order to reduce these uncertainties, it is necessary to generate sound scientific data on hazard and exposure by means of relevant frameworks and tools. The development of such approaches to facilitate the risk assessment (RA) of MNs has become a dynamic area of research. The aim of this paper was to review and critically analyse these approaches against a set of relevant criteria. The analysis concluded that none of the reviewed frameworks were able to fulfill all evaluation criteria. Many of the existing modelling tools are designed to provide screening-level assessments rather than to support regulatory RA and risk management. Nevertheless, there is a tendency towards developing more quantitative, higher-tier models, capable of incorporating uncertainty into their analyses. There is also a trend towards developing validated experimental protocols for material identification and hazard testing, reproducible across laboratories. These tools could enable a shift from a costly case-by-case RA of MNs towards a targeted, flexible and efficient process, based on grouping and read-across strategies and compliant with the 3R (Replacement, Reduction, Refinement) principles. In order to facilitate this process, it is important to transform the current efforts on developing databases and computational models into creating an integrated data and tools infrastructure to support the risk assessment and management of MNs.

Application of a quantitative weight of evidence approach for ranking and prioritising occupational exposure scenarios for titanium dioxide and carbon nanomaterials

Abstract Substantial limitations and uncertainties hinder the exposure assessment of engineered nanomaterials (ENMs). The present deficit of reliable measurements and models will inevitably lead in the near term to qualitative and uncertain exposure estimations, which may fail to support adequate risk assessment and management. Therefore it is necessary to complement the current toolset with user-friendly methods for near-term nanosafety evaluation. This paper proposes an approach for relative exposure screening of ENMs. For the first time, an exposure model explicitly implements quantitative weight of evidence (WoE) methods and utilises expert judgement for filling data gaps in the available evidence-base. Application of the framework is illustrated for screening of exposure scenarios for nanoscale titanium dioxide, carbon nanotubes and fullerenes, but it is applicable to other nanomaterials as well. The results show that the WoE-based model overestimates exposure for scenarios where expert judgement was substantially used to fill data gaps, which suggests its conservative nature. In order to test how variations in input data influence the obtained results, probabilistic Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis was applied to demonstrate that the model performs in stable manner.

The MARINA Risk Assessment Strategy: A Flexible Strategy for Efficient Information Collection and Risk Assessment of Nanomaterials.

An engineered nanomaterial (ENM) may actually consist of a population of primary particles, aggregates and agglomerates of various sizes. Furthermore, their physico-chemical characteristics may change during the various life-cycle stages. It will probably not be feasible to test all varieties of all ENMs for possible health and environmental risks. There is therefore a need to further develop the approaches for risk assessment of ENMs. Within the EU FP7 project Managing Risks of Nanoparticles (MARINA) a two-phase risk assessment strategy has been developed. In Phase 1 (Problem framing) a base set of information is considered, relevant exposure scenarios (RESs) are identified and the scope for Phase 2 (Risk assessment) is established. The relevance of an RES is indicated by information on exposure, fate/kinetics and/or hazard; these three domains are included as separate pillars that contain specific tools. Phase 2 consists of an iterative process of risk characterization, identification of data needs and integrated collection and evaluation of data on the three domains, until sufficient information is obtained to conclude on possible risks in a RES. Only data are generated that are considered to be needed for the purpose of risk assessment. A fourth pillar, risk characterization, is defined and it contains risk assessment tools. This strategy describes a flexible and efficient approach for data collection and risk assessment which is essential to ensure safety of ENMs. Further developments are needed to provide guidance and make the MARINA Risk Assessment Strategy operational. Case studies will be needed to refine the strategy.

A Model-Based Prioritisation Exercise for the European Water Framework Directive

A model-based prioritisation exercise has been carried out for the Water Framework Directive (WFD) implementation. The approach considers two aspects: the hazard of a certain chemical and its exposure levels, and focuses on aquatic ecosystems, but also takes into account hazards due to secondary poisoning, bioaccumulation through the food chain and potential human health effects. A list provided by EU Member States, Stakeholders and Non-Governmental Organizations comprising 2,034 substances was evaluated according to hazard and exposure criteria. Then 78 substances classified as “of high concern” where analysed and ranked in terms of risk ratio (Predicted Environmental Concentration/Predicted No-Effect Concentration). This exercise has been complemented by a monitoring-based prioritization exercise using data provided by Member States. The proposed approach constitutes the first step in setting the basis for an open modular screening tool that could be used for the next prioritization exercises foreseen by the WFD.

Integrated Risk Assessment for WFD Ecological Status classification applied to Llobregat river basin (Spain). Part II - Evaluation process applied to five environmental Lines of Evidence.

Many indicators and indices related to a variety of biological, physico-chemical, chemical, and hydromorphological water conditions have been recently developed or adapted by scientists in order to support water managers in the Water Framework Directive (WFD) implementation. In this context, the achievement of a comprehensive and reliable Ecological Status classification of water bodies across Europe is hampered by the lack of harmonised procedures for selecting an appropriate set of indicators and integrating heterogeneous information in a flexible way. To this purpose, an Integrated Risk Assessment (IRA)(2) methodology was developed based on the Weight of Evidence approach. This method analyses and combines a set of environmental indicators grouped into five Lines of Evidence (LoE), i.e. Biology, Chemistry, Ecotoxicology, Physico-chemistry and Hydromorphology. The whole IRA methodology has been implemented as a specific module into a freeware GIS (Geographic Information System)-based Decision Support System, named MODELKEY DSS. This paper focuses on the evaluation of the four supporting LoE (i.e. Chemistry, Ecotoxicology, Physico-chemistry and Hydromorphology), and includes a procedure for a comparison of each indicator with proper thresholds and a subsequent integration process to combine the obtained output with the LoE Biology results in order to provide a single score expressing the Ecological Status classification. The approach supports the identification of the most prominent stressors, which are responsible for the observed alterations in the river basin under investigation. The results provided by the preliminary testing of the IRA methodology through application of the MODELKEY DSS to the Llobregat case study are finally reported and discussed.